Preferred Campaign Length

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

Tommy Brownell

Legendary Pubber
Joined
Apr 30, 2017
Messages
3,982
Reaction score
10,756
What is your preferred campaign length? How deep in do you usually start getting distracted by the new and shiny and start looking for something else to play/run?

Bringing this up because I was chatting with some folks who were flabberghasted that we're 30 some sessions into the East Texas University plot point campaign and we're now just a little ways over halfway through (just about to hit first midterms of Junior year, campaign is designed to run through the end of senior year).
 
I would love to run some longer campaigns. Right now, I feel no urge to end my Rune Quest campaign. My Traveller campaign will probably have a shorter life unless something really takes off.

One thing that helps is I now run two campaigns on alternate weeks. That helps me have more opportunity to run more things and also keeps any one campaign from feeling like a total slog.
 
What is your preferred campaign length?
I don't game frequently enough these days to have long campaigns. (And I'm talking pre-Covid). So, running dozens of sessions over 6-12+ months is not really an option any more. Maybe it will be in the future; we'll see.

Playing twice/month, my ideal campaigns would last around 8-10 sessions. That's seemed like enough time to develop the campaign and bring it to a suitable end-point. I don't run sandboxes, so the campaigns are more mission- or mystery-focused.

How deep in do you usually start getting distracted by the new and shiny and start looking for something else to play/run?
If I'm focused on running a campaign, then I don't get distracted by new and shiny things. It's only when I'm not running a campaign that my interests drift.

I tend to use OneDrive to plan out a number of campaigns, and refine them as time goes on. So, I always have some options in the tank to explore when I want to run something new.
 
Since we're talking ideals and not what's realistic, I'll say 2 to 3 months, meeting weekly. Nothing stopping you from starting up a new campaign with the same characters afterwards, but I think that's a good timeframe for a good, solid, complete story. I don't want to chase the carrot and never get it. Give me the carrot, then find a new carrot to dangle if you want to keep going. Easy.
 
Since we're talking ideals and not what's realistic, I'll say 2 to 3 months, meeting weekly. Nothing stopping you from starting up a new campaign with the same characters afterwards, but I think that's a good timeframe for a good, solid, complete story. I don't want to chase the carrot and never get it. Give me the carrot, then find a new carrot to dangle if you want to keep going. Easy.

I agree with that. I like resolution. All my old campaigns, for years, ran until something happened and people stopped showing up. Now I *try* to aim for an ending...whether it's a longer campaign or a shorter one.
 
One session, then I get bored and have a new idea. Sadly, players don't bore as easy as I do so usually longer than that. I aim for ten to twenty sessions with a glorious heroic TPK to end things cause heroic sacrifice is the best way end a campaign.
 
I usually like to play through an adventure, then switch to another game. I may return to the former game at some point. If and when I do, I allow the players to chose whether they want to run the same characters or make new ones.

I greatly prefer the smaller adventures to "world hanging in the balance" campaigns. My favorite fantasy author is Leiber, and most of his stuff is short stories and novellas. I find that mirrors the structure of most of the best RPG sessons I've had... a raid, a heist, etc. I guess I prefer smaller scale adventures. For me the original Mad Max Trilogy is a better example of the type of campaign I'd like to run than, say, Lord of the Rings. And I'm not referring to the genre. And even then, it'd be split up by other games in between "films".

I do get bored easily, and I'm usually ready to move to something else (if only temporarily) by the time an adventure wraps up. For example, my group is 11 sessions deep in Dead Planet for Mothership. We only play for 2-ish hours, so that's not as much as it sounds like. It's fun, but I'm wanting to play something else once we wrap it up, which I think will be another session or two. I plan to return to Mothership, as my group and I really like it. But I wouldn't want to start another module without playing something else first. There are so many good games to play, I can't imagine sticking with one for a long, uninterrupted stretch. Too much "new game" or "game I've always wanted to try" excitement. And I view choosing games as the prerogative of a forever DM. Though, to be fair, I usually present them with three games, have them make a first and second choice, and select the next game runoff election style.
 
I’d love to play a long term (12+ month) game, but in practice most of our games tend to last 10-12 sessions, maybe up to 20 (playing weekly). This is in-part because we keep finding new interesting games we want to try out, or because we feel like a new genre. This has lead us to playing games in ‘seasons’ where we run an arc and, if we like the game, we come back for a later season with the same characters.
 
I've went 20 years in the one campaign setting, but individual campaigns generally ranged from 4-5 years. More recently two years appears to be the average with my group. I think it also depends on the system, experience awards and character progression. Zweihander appears to be set up for the characters to retire after the third tier profession. The characters have just started tier three so another 6 months is all I will be able to squeeze out of the current campaign which will bring it to 2 and a half years.

After that its back to Earthdawn to pick up where we left off on an unfinished campaign that had been running for about 3 years.
 
For many years I ran an ongoing campaign that was like a fantasy soap opera of revolving characters, npcs and adventures and it was great fun until the point I tired of things and felt the need for a tighter focus and some variety. Nowadays I like long campaigns (30+ sessions) that have a clearly defined end point, interspersed with shorter bursts of 4-6 session episodic games. The new shiny may find a home in those short burst games but I feel no pressure to run them simply because they're new and here; they can wait their turn, it's not like they'll crumble into dust if I ignore them for a while. The longer games tick my boxes of having scope for development of characters and the feeling of embarking on a journey with varied scenery and unexpected twists and turns, all the while knowing that the journey will end.
 
Never really been in a very long campaign, either as a GM or player. Typically we seem to favour games that last for 3-6 sessions, some might go on twice as long. On a monthly schedule that's a whole year. Even a weekly schedule, which is never entirely weekly, that's months.

Bear in mind I've always been in groups in which most players are also GMs in their own right, shutting out everyone else from being able to GM for a year feels a bit harsh. But even as a player, do I really want to be rescricted to just one character/setting/genre for a whole year. This is of course unless of course you have enough free time to regularly play in multiple games, in which case, kudos.

A lot of things feed into the shorter campaign mode. You probably aren't doing zero to hero sort of games or games where one combat round takes up most of the session. Adventures are morre likely to cut to the chase. Session zero is probably not a good use of time. It's just a different style of play with different priorities, but they are priorities that suit me. Even without the practical issues listed above, I'm not sure I'd fancy much longer campaigns.
 
Back in the 90's I would have said forever. These days I prefer both as a player and as GM, to have some kind of end in sight. My gaming friends is the same.
As examples, this year I was a player in a 13th Age Legacy of Fire (Pathfinder Adventure Path) game. Now I'm in a Fall of London (Vanpire V5) campaign.
So no set time limit, but just how long it takes to complete either the prewritten campaign or what the GM has cooked up.
 
"Whatever strikes my fancy". This might be anything from a one-shot to years of weekly (or more often) gaming, but I refuse to be restricted by preconcieved notions:devil:!
 
I refuse to be restricted by preconcieved notions:devil:!
I know, right?

Prospective Player: ”Due to X, Y, Z, blah, blah, blah, I can spend no more than 239.46 minutes per bi-weekly period to devote to gaming, which must be one of these three genres, using one of these 4 systems. Any campaign must end by the 14th session, after which time I may be consulted to grant my approval for the next campaign.”

Group of Players: “Don’t call us, we’ll call you.”

Prospective Player on the Internet: “I can never get a group to play with around here.”

Jesus Wept.
 
What is your preferred campaign length?
Open-ended.

How deep in do you usually start getting distracted by the new and shiny and start looking for something else to play/run?
I don't get distracted by 'new and shiny.' If I start a campaign, it's because I have a deep and abiding interest in exploring that world.

I can also play or run more than one game at a time. My GangBusters campaign is pretty prep-intensive - it's a physical and social sandbox - but I can grab a random deckplan from among my .pdfs and run Mothership in about an hour.

Even if it's not until players start dying off.
That's how our Boot Hill campaign ended. I don't recommend it.
 
For my part:

It varies. I do like any campaign I run these days to have an eventual end point. As noted above, all my earlier campaigns reached the point where people just stopped showing up. Once I started running Savage Worlds, I adopted the idea of the plot point campaigns for most of my campaigns: that the characters need to reach a resolution. Doesn't mean we don't revisit those characters later...we might!

But I do prefer longer games (like our ETU game, which has a ton of background elements, subplots and supporting characters at this point) over, say, six sessions and we're done. But I'm not opposed to something like that just to try out a game.

I do have the benefit of having the same group of players, we get together (virtually) more or less regularly, and I'm the only GM in the group.
 
I like to run significant short arcs inside of larger arcs. I've had games end for all manner of reasons, and Ive found that some regular closure helps take the sting out.
Basically what I do. I like 6-16session 'arcs', which is normally a natural 'end credits' point. Then if we switch GMs and/or genres we can or we do another 6-16 session arc
 
But I'm not opposed to something like that just to try out a game.

I do have the benefit of having the same group of players, we get together (virtually) more or less regularly, and I'm the only GM in the group.

I looked at my shelf a few years back and saw all these games that had never seen play, so I ran one shots once a month with a different game each time just to say that I've at least played them once. Was a nice change of pace. I think we did maybe 6-8 months that way.
 
I looked at my shelf a few years back and saw all these games that had never seen play, so I ran one shots once a month with a different game each time just to say that I've at least played them once. Was a nice change of pace. I think we did maybe 6-8 months that way.

I think I wouldn't mind that. Especially if we had fewer interruptions and were back to weekly for ETU: Three weeks of ETU and then a one shot of something.
 
Open-ended.
Best kind there is. But I think we're talking about an estimate of how long it's likely to last, based on your experience.

That's how our Boot Hill campaign ended. I don't recommend it.
I wouldn't, either. Though I can add that we've had such a sad event in a PbP game.
Said game is still going, though:shade:!
I know, right?

Prospective Player: ”Due to X, Y, Z, blah, blah, blah, I can spend no more than 239.46 minutes per bi-weekly period to devote to gaming, which must be one of these three genres, using one of these 4 systems. Any campaign must end by the 14th session, after which time I may be consulted to grant my approval for the next campaign.”

Group of Players: “Don’t call us, we’ll call you.”

Prospective Player on the Internet: “I can never get a group to play with around here.”

Jesus Wept.
I'm almost afraid to ask whether this is a real example...
But you know me, of course I'm asking:thumbsup:!

Also, you missed the reply of the Internet:
"I wonder why!"

(Or, if Gronan is around: "Gary Gygax managed to find a score of players in Lake Geneva in the 70ies. If he managed that, so can you!")
 
Man, I miss the ones that would go on and on for years. It's been a long time since those days. Now 3 months or so seems about the average for me.
 
I always think in terms of long term epic campaigns, but the sad reality is that I've only managed to run one to completion and that was The Enemy Within (with a lot of filler between parts) for WFRP 1e when it was originally released back in the 80s. All my other attempts since have ended prematurely due to real life reasons getting in the way, either for me or a majority of the players. Consequently, I have within the last year decided to rethink my preference and start trying to plan for shorter campaigns lasting a mere dozen sessions so they can have a satisfying conclusion. For longer campaigns like ETU, I would want to make each year a "season" with a satisfying season finale, with the option of running subsequent seasons if all involved are interested and circumstances permit that to happen. I hope it will help attract players willing to commit to the game as well since it has a predefined duration rather than "as long as it takes" or more likely, "until it (inevitably) peters out."
 
I find the overall length to be less important than the length of arcs within the campaign. Ideally, somewhere between 6-15 sessions is my sweet spot for a story arc. There should be some level of closure at that point, though the overall campaign can continue as new and established ideas are developed. Without this kind of internal arcs, I find long term campaign lose shape and have a tendency to become dull or unfocussed experiences.
 
I’ve found taking into consideration weather, seasons, and difficulties with and means of travel give plenty of ways to segment things into more digestible chunks as opposed to a never-ending decade-long session.

It’s funny. The more realistic/verisimilar, organic, setting-based elements you remove or exclude from a game because they aren’t heroic/dramatic/whatever enough, the more you have to go hunting for artificial, non-organic, external elements to do the same thing.
 
I’ve found taking into consideration weather, seasons, and difficulties with and means of travel give plenty of ways to segment things into more digestible chunks as opposed to a never-ending decade-long session.

It’s funny. The more realistic/verisimilar, organic, setting-based elements you remove or exclude from a game because they aren’t heroic/dramatic/whatever enough, the more you have to go hunting for artificial, non-organic, external elements to do the same thing.
Well, it's only natural. Heroism is way too often a function of people encountering the "non-heroic enough" elements, so when systems exclude them, they actually exclude one of the main elements for it:shade:!

But you should have seen the reaction to me suggesting over at TBP that making "heroic" be "mechanically optimal" is actually working against heroism.
 
Last edited:
For me, anywhere from half a year to a year, roughly (we tend to average about three sessions a month).

Some of that can vary depending on the nature of the rules being used. Because of the nature of leveling in D&D/AD&D, you ideally need a fair amount of time to hit on many of the classic tropes. As a result my Basic Fantasy game may well extend past a year.
 
Last edited:
I tend to enjoy alternating between a longer campaign with one shots and short sessions throughout. I feel a lot of games peter out after 10 sessions, I prefer there be some kind of wrap-up to a campaign rather than it go out with a whimper.
 
I tend to enjoy alternating between a longer campaign with one shots and short sessions throughout. I feel a lot of games peter out after 10 sessions, I prefer there be some kind of wrap-up to a campaign rather than it go out with a whimper.
I prefer to have an epic victory where we've defeated the whole Realm and taken over the world:grin:!

...Or, for other campaigns, we've paid off our spaceship and are exploiting the trade routes we discovered:thumbsup:. Either one works!

Note to self, need to get into a campaign where we kick Chthulhu between the tentacles:devil:!
 
Six to twelve sessions is typical for me these days. Real world issues often interrupt and by the time I'm ready to get back into it, I'm usually interested in a new setting or game system.
 
I like campaigns that go on (preferably every week) for 6 to 16 sessions as it is hard for me to maintain the necessary passion to go longer (and I think the players usually want to try something new at that point too). This unfortunately means I can't play Call of Cthulhu's best known campaigns as they are just too long.
 
As long as it will go and still be fun :smile:

It's nice to have that last epic battle and the characters to ride off into the sunset to their reward, but we've done that very few times. In general, the campaigns just fade away.
 
I have two speeds.

D&D campaigns that last 1-2 years. This is generally the amount of time to run one of the published book campaigns, taking characters from levels 1-15.

Palate-cleanser campaigns that last 8 weeks. This is when I want to try a new game or something we don't usually play. Often as interludes to break up a long D&D campaign. This is where we play Deadlands or Star Wars or Hollow Earth Expedition or Coriolis or something.
 
I have two speeds.

D&D campaigns that last 1-2 years. This is generally the amount of time to run one of the published book campaigns, taking characters from levels 1-15.

Palate-cleanser campaigns that last 8 weeks. This is when I want to try a new game or something we don't usually play. Often as interludes to break up a long D&D campaign. This is where we play Deadlands or Star Wars or Hollow Earth Expedition or Coriolis or something.
Funny, I'd switch the durations:shade:!
 
I'm the same with most people here.

The "standard" campaign arc is a "season" of about 12 sessions. If we like the characters and setting, we may extend for another season.

A mini-campaign is usually 4 sessions, and usually it is based on a classic module, like White Plume Mountain, Expeditions to the Barrier Peaks, or Steve Jackson's Sorcery! series. If we enjoy the mini-campaign enough, we may revisit the setting again with a sequel or spin-off mini-campaign.

I find that cycling between campaigns/rules/genres prevents fatigue, and having a pre-agreed campaign duration allows people to plan the calendars.

Pre-COVID, I used to plan my campaign calendar some nine months ahead. Usually the campaigns are separated by my planned vacations, and I let my pool of players know what I am running from which month to which month, and they plan around it accordingly; say a player is planning a vacation in May, and my sci-fi campaign runs from April to June - he will know to sit that one out and ask for a spot in my July campaign, for example. I keep a "stable" of players that is slightly bigger than the number of seats I have around my gaming table, and with this system of early notice we increase the chances of having a game on any given week.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top